How do you limit rebuys in home games? (1 Viewer)

[odorf]

We usually start with 200 chips in a 1/2 game. Some players like to rebuy up to the current max stack, and after 2–3 hours several people end up with 2000–2500 chips. At that point the game becomes too tight.


Do you use any restrictions on rebuys in your home games?

 

[BamaT8ter]

We had a similar issue in one of my games. For us, it wasn't an issue of the game becoming too tight. It became an issue that the amount in play got so large that some players became uncomfortable with the stakes. After it ran off some players, we adjusted by: (10 eliminating the match the stack option; (2)going to a fixed max buy in that goes up once during the night; and (3) requiring players to be down at least $100 before they can top up. The stacks still get pretty big, but it's slowed the progression down a bit.

Of course, if your guys are total degens, the limits might be a turn off too. YMMV.

 

[toothpic]

Putting a cap on buyin amounts at one time helps, but the fine tuning you'll need to do is finding that sweet spot. We used to allow up to match up to half of the big stack but that got too big. Now we cap at $300 max and that seems to work for us when we are playing 0.25/0.50 mixed games. Most buyin with $100 to start, some start with $200 so $300 works well. It's big enough that you don't feel like a tiny stack, but not too large that things go off the rails.

For a 1/2 hold em game, maybe capping to something like $500 would work. What are your current buy in structures like?

 

[acezag]

Allowing players to match the big stack is a truly huge advantage for your most skilled players, who are likely already way ahead of the pack.
Don't limit the number of rebuys - limit the size of them. Matching half the big stack is more than enough.

 

[mdt11]

You have a few options:
- Lower the variable cap from "match the stack" to half the big stack
- Limit the cap to a set $ like $300 (this is generally what they do in public games). Players can still acquire 2K stacks from other players but it will be much tougher and take longer
- Limit the total amount of $ a player can lose or buy in for in a night. They are cut off after a certain point.

I would suggest either the first or the second.

At my game we play $1/$2, $300 initial buyin/cap. After 90 minutes, cap goes up to $500 or half the big stack. Even with those restrictions we still end up with 2 or 3 stacks over 2K at the end of the night.

 

[odorf]

We tried match the half stack and it was pretty good
I don't get why everyone discussing $ and not chips, it is much more important to know BB count you could win/loose and then adjust chip price

 

[grahamplayscards]

We had a similar issue in one of my games. For us, it wasn't an issue of the game becoming too tight. It became an issue that the amount in play got so large that some players became uncomfortable with the stakes. After it ran off some players, we adjusted by: (10 eliminating the match the stack option; (2)going to a fixed max buy in that goes up once during the night; and (3) requiring players to be down at least $100 before they can top up. The stacks still get pretty big, but it's slowed the progression down a bit.

Of course, if your guys are total degens, the limits might be a turn off too. YMMV.

Am degen

Would turn me off from a game

Please don’t take away my ability to get even or get even worse, hosts!

 

[CraigT78]

1/2 the big stack.

 

[Hot Nuts]

No limit

 

[detroitdad]

We usually start with 200 chips in a 1/2 game. Some players like to rebuy up to the current max stack, and after 2–3 hours several people end up with 2000–2500 chips. At that point the game becomes too tight.


Do you use any restrictions on rebuys in your home games?

$100 max buy in, or half the deep stack.

 

[odorf]

Is it reasonable to increase blinds at the second half? Stacks become deeper and bets increased anyway, not sure is it common scenario...

 

[4SUMERZ]

At my cash game, we only can rebuy at the starting stack level, but when their stack gets to less than 1/4 of starting stack, they can rebuy another starting stack at that time. No limit on rebuys, but the game playing time is set prior to the start of the game, typically 4.5 hours

 

[acezag]

Is it reasonable to increase blinds at the second half? Stacks become deeper and bets increased anyway, not sure is it common scenario...

This disadvantages smaller stacks pretty significantly, who are already challenged when there are really big stacks on the table. It's also another advantage to more experienced or skilled folks.

 

[Taghkanic]

In my 2/5 game, the max is 1K or half the biggest stack.

My regs would revolt if I tried to limit topoffs/reloads.

There have been just a couple times in years of hosting where I was starting to feel uneasy about a tilted player rebuying repeatedly—but have never had things go so far that I actually cut them off.

My players are adults and have to know their own limits... I suppose if one of them got really drunk/high and truly didn’t know what they were doing, or if someone was obviously going through something outside of poker and seemed in a bad way, that could force my hand. But I’d probably do the same if they were winning yet clearly not in their right mind.

 

[Rhodeman77]

I’ve been working on getting my players to play more circus games. We have done limit circus but now are transitioning to pot limit circus. My normal game was $1/1 RxR with a $300 buy-in and match the stack option. Players were much more apprehensive to play the same stakes while learning circus games as big bet. So I have lowered the blinds to 25/50c. Max buy-in is now $200 to start with an increase to $300 at midnight. So far it has worked well and there is still plenty of money on the table.

 

[odorf]

I suppose it is a question about balance between friendly game and wish to win anyway, and not about money. We play with relatively small buyins - 20$ and increasing it in 10 times is not a problem for anyone, but it become more nervous after such increase.

 

[4SUMERZ]

Great point.

 

[4SUMERZ]

I suppose it is a question about balance between friendly game and wish to win anyway, and not about money. We play with relatively small buyins - 20$ and increasing it in 10 times is not a problem for anyone, but it become more nervous after such increase.

That is a great point. Much like my home game, it's not about making a living out of playing poker, or have someone lose a car payment on a night. It's more of a social thing with a bit of $ on the line to make it competitive but enjoyable at the same time. We do $25 buy in, $0.25 / $0.25 blinds with starting stack of $25, made up of $0.25-$0.50-$1.00 and $5.00 chips. When a stack gets to less than $8.00, then they can rebuy $25 more chips to add on to their existing small stack. It works out quite well at my game made up of a table of 8 players. We play 2 card hold'Em, 3 card pineapple and 4 card Omaha, dealers choice. We also each toss in $2.00 at the beginning of the night, and that pot goes to the best hand of the evening in a 4.5 hr

 

[Poker Zombie]

I started with a $20 buy-in with top-offs up to $20. That got some blowback from a top-tier player who took a few bad beats, so now (with a $50 buy-in) I go to $50 or 1/2 the big stack. The biggest winner and biggest loser were +/- roughly $120 for the night.

 

[FullMonty28]

I started with a $20 buy-in with top-offs up to $20. That got some blowback from a top-tier player who took a few bad beats, so now (with a $50 buy-in) I go to $50 or 1/2 the big stack. The biggest winner and biggest loser were +/- roughly $120 for the night.

I don't think catering to the top-tier player is the best idea. They have enough of an advantage as is. In the home game I used to play back home, it was 1/1 and there was one pro that would play. Whenever he would lose a hand, he would add on, or if someone won a big pot, he would want to match their stack. Most players were bad at poker and these stakes were decently high, so it would usually result in them nitting up or cashing out early. By catering to the top player, it usually plays out pretty badly for the weaker players.
Sticking to a max buyin of 200bb is usually reasonable. But you can play it by ear and adjust that for your specific group of players. Others suggest match half biggest stack, which seems to turn out well too.

 

[Poker Zombie]

I don't think catering to the top-tier player is the best idea. They have enough of an advantage as is. In the home game I used to play back home, it was 1/1 and there was one pro that would play. Whenever he would lose a hand, he would add on, or if someone won a big pot, he would want to match their stack. Most players were bad at poker and these stakes were decently high, so it would usually result in them nitting up or cashing out early. By catering to the top player, it usually plays out pretty badly for the weaker players.
Sticking to a max buyin of 200bb is usually reasonable. But you can play it by ear and adjust that for your specific group of players. Others suggest match half biggest stack, which seems to turn out well too.

I agree that it is usually a bad idea to cater to the top-tier player. However, with a $20 game, it made some sense, as we were playing 80 BB deep. first rebuy and you are still just ~80 bb deep. Around the second rebuy you are still only topping up 100 bb or so. Giving the top-tier player a little extra leverage was actually good for the game, as players got to see bigger pots without effectively taking on a bigger risk.

As the buy-in size progressed, I never had the need to reduce the half-stack limit, but the table also plays 25¢-50¢, so still at 100 BB.

You can listen to the top players and make adjustments. It's all about how you want your game to evolve.